Matisse portrait claim rejected by National Gallery: The National Gallery in London has rejected a claim for a portrait by Matisse that survived the bombing of Germany during the Second World War. The descendants of the sitter, the artist Greta Moll, argue that the work was misappropriated after being entrusted to a family friend who took it from the Soviet zone of Berlin to Switzerland in 1947.

Customs return ivories to London dealer after three-year battle: Following a long legal battle, London dealer Joost van den Bergh has successfully overturned a controversial customs decision to seize three rare 17th century ivories. UK Border Force had threatened to destroy the artworks that, through no fault of the dealer, had been shipped from the US without the proper paperwork.

Geneva free port to tighten up checks: Geneva’s free port says it is tightening up checks on wealthy individuals storing fine art and other riches at its huge warehouse facilities. This follows a critical 2014 federal report, which highlighted the possible risks of trade-free zones to Switzerland’s reputation.

Court orders Swiss art dealer to face fraud trial: Russian billionaire and club owner Dmitry Rybolovlev bought a total of 37 masterpieces worth two billion euros ($2.1 billion) through art dealer Yves Bouvier over the space of a decade. But their relationship disintegrated last year after he accused Bouvier of inflating prices, rather than finding him the best price, and taking a commission. On Thursday, the Monaco appeals court rejected Bouvier’s request that the case be dismissed, and ruled he should face fraud and money-laundering charges.

Holocaust Revisionism in German Motion to Dismiss Guelph Claim Elicits Condemnation: Alan Philipp and Gerald Stiebel sued the Federal Republic of Germany and the Stiftung Preussischer Kulturbesitz (SPK) in February for restitution of the Guelph Treasure (or Welfenschatz as it is known in Germany). Germany’s response to the Complaint advances a stunning revisionism about the Holocaust and the international commitments that Germany has made.

Germany’s Dating Of Start Of Holocaust Questioned: The website of the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston defines the Nazi era as 1933 until 1945. The Jewish Virtual Library similarly dates the Nazi era as from the time the Nazis came to power in 1933 through the end of World War II. But in court papers filed last week in Washington, D.C., the German government contends that three German Jewish art collectors could not have been forced by the Nazis to sell their collection in 1935 because “the alleged taking of the Welfenschatz [collection] in 1935 predated the Holocaust by several years.”

Gallerist Michael Werner Lambasts Germany’s Cultural Protection Law: The German gallerist and art dealer Michael Werner has questioned the motives behind German culture minister Monika Grütters’s proposed changes to Germany’s cultural heritage legislation. “It can only be about control,” he wrote. “They want to know, despite contrary statements, what private citizens have hanging in their living rooms. They want to make money, as they did in 2014 with the ‘normalization’ of the VAT rate on works of art.”

Photo Banned From Instragram on View Now in London’s National Portrait Gallery: Joey L.’s portrait of a militant woman in the Kurdish Workers’ Party (also known as the ‘PKK’) named ‘Sarya,’ holding a rocket-propelled grenade launcher, was taken down from Instagram in September, along with other images from the same project. This week, the same portrait opened to the public in London’s National Portrait Gallery. An Instagram spokesperson would only point to a line from its community guidelines, which reads: “Instagram is not a place to support or praise terrorism, organized crime, or hate groups.”

Google creates virtual British Museum display: Google engineers have come a step closer to realising the Enlightenment fantasy of a universally accessible collection of world history and culture, the director of the British Museum said on Thursday. The museum has already embraced the opportunities of web technology, putting 3m images of its artefacts on its own site. But curators said the Google deal would tackle the “library catalogue” problem, allowing people to navigate its collection much more easily.

Billionaire Collector Peter Brant Sues Insurer Lloyds of London for Damaged Warhols Worth $60 Million: Brant sues his insurer, Lloyds of London over what he says is $9 million worth of damage to a group of silkscreen Electric Chairs by Andy Warhol that he loaned to a major exhibition in Italy in 2013. Brant filed suit in Manhattan Supreme Court on Friday, November 6.

Experts question the authenticity of a group of works by Jackson Pollock: Questions have been raised about the authenticity of a group of works attributed to Jackson Pollock, six of which were exhibited at the Art Monaco fair in July by the Nevada-based Classic Fine Art. Around 30 paintings from the group were privately analysed by Art Access & Research, a UK-based company, in 2010. Tests suggests pigment used in some of the paintings not commercially available before artist’s death in 1956.

Authenticating Warhol After the Board’s Disbanding: Richard Polsky devoted his career to learning the ins and outs of the Pop master’s market. Last week, Polsky launched a Warhol authentication service. It’s a task that is both necessary and risky, given the lengthy, and very costly, legal battles the artist’s prolific output has sparked over the years. Most famously, Joe Simon-Whelan, an American-born, London-based filmmaker, sued the Andy Warhol Art Authentication Board in New York City over its 2007 ruling that a minor Warhol silk-screen called “Red Self-Portrait” (1964-65) was inauthentic. After a series of such suits resulted in a reported $7 million in legal fees, the Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, which manages the artist’s estate, dissolved the board in 2012.

Galin v. Kunitake Hamada (2015), or Legal Storm over “Ice Storm”: In early September 2015, a former Tennessee news anchor who invested in Andrew Wyeth’s Ice Storm sued a Japanese art dealer in the Southern District of New York over the proceeds from the Painting’s May 2015 sale at Christie’s. The investor, Reed Galin, purchased a one-third interest in Ice Storm from his childhood friend and college roommate, now-disgraced art dealer David Ramus, in the late 1980’s. The controversy over Ice Storm began in 1989 when Ramus bought the painting from Christie’s for $319,000 to be financed via an extended payment plan.

New VARA Ruling Muddies Analysis on Moral Rights and Significance of “Site Specific” Art: A recent injunction ruling that prohibited the destruction of the “Bicentennial Freedom Mural” in Corona, California had occasion to consider the rights asserted by the plaintiffs and artists under the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 (VARA), 17 U.S.C. § 106A.The order ultimately granted the injunction but on different grounds, holding that the plaintiffs were unlikely to prevail on their VARA claim.

Auction houses hammer it out as competition heats up: In 2000, the former chief executive of Christie’s blew the whistle on a $100m price-fixing cartel at the auction houses that control what is now a €51bn global art market. Alfred Taubman, owner of rival Sotheby’s, was jailed for nine-and-a-half months for his role in the scandal. Fifteen years later, Sotheby’s is halfway through a sale of its former chairman’s artworks that is viewed as a bellwether of today’s more competitive industry in a week when the world’s top sales houses are hosting closely watched auctions. So far, however, what Sotheby’s billed as a “highly anticipated” series of sales has revealed concerns that heavy supply, stretched estimates and slowing global economies are weighing on the business of trading multimillion-dollar treasures.

Results for Taubman collection question level of guarantee: The hefty guarantee paid out by Sotheby’s to secure the Alfred Taubman collection meant the stakes were running high for the first and most financially crucial tranche of the four-part auction staged at Sotheby’s New York. In the sale given the title of ‘Taubman Masterworks’ on November 4, the market reacted somewhat unfavourably to hefty estimates as six of the top ten lots went for sums below the low end of expectations.As a public company Sotheby’s are at a disadvantage when it comes to guarantees. They have to take into account shareholder value and tell the market whenever an extension to the credit line is required. The level of the guarantee implies Sotheby’s went to great lengths to avoid the embarrassment of seeing works amassed by their former owner being sold elsewhere. This was the sale that Sotheby’s couldn’t afford to lose.

Indians take legal action to retrieve Koh-i-noor diamond: The week before Indian PM Narendra Modi’s visit to the UK, a group of influential Indians have reportedly instructed lawyers to begin legal proceedings demanding the Government return the 105-carat Koh-i-noor diamond to India.

We’ll store your artefacts, US tells Syrian museums: As Isil destroys ancient temples and monuments across Syria and Iraq, the Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD) is encouraging US museums to act as safe havens for threatened works of art in the collections of governments, museums and private individuals in conflict zones. But there are concerns that looted artefacts could be among the works sent to the US. New guidelines published by the AAMD in October provide a framework for museums to house objects that are at risk due to conflict, terrorism or natural disasters at the owner’s request until it is safe to return them. The objects will be treated as loans and registered on the AAMD’s website. The owners are required to pay the shipping costs.

NOTE: Please note that most excerpts come from the original publication and any credit must go to the author of the publication, not to Constantine Cannon LLP. Any views or opinions expressed in the excerpts and/or articles belong solely to the author of the publication. Constantine Cannon LLP does not approve or endorse any view or opinion contained therein. Due to some copyright restrictions, please do not redistribute this email without our consent. Should you like to include someone in the mailing list, please let us know. We will be happy to do it! If you do not wish to receive the Art Law News Update, please unsubscribe through the link below.